I'm a dozenalist, but we live in a base-10 society (lolol). So I'm often at odds with the convention in that regard.

Personally, I think we should just migrate over to base 12. Rework the ascii tables and unicode standards. Start designing our hardware for base 12. If I were in a dictatorship, this is what I would initiate, honestly.

I know people disagree with me, and they have their reasons. Some of those being that all the books and texts books and computer programs that we have already are in base 10 and it's just as well to stick with that they say. That's a fair point but I think the efficiency of base 12 is worth the effort to fix all that. We live in a digital age. Our computers do I don't know how many million FLOPS. Switching things from base 10 to base 12 is really simple at it's core. And the cores of our computers work in binary, a different base anyways. We can just get the computers to do all the work of changing the numbers in all the documents anyways. And we can convert PDFs to text using graphics to text technology. We can do all that.

---

So I think if you think society is better in base 10, and you think that we shouldn't drop what we are doing now and start the switch to base 12, you are delusional. Your response?

All modern countries use base 10. If only one of these countries were to switch to dozenal, then discussion and research with mathematics and science becomes substantially more challenging. Scientists have already managed to crash a spaceship into Mars because they used the wrong units; imagine what they could do when 10 actually means twelve!

Changing from base 10 to base 12 is no simple task either. The USA already failed to switch from US measurements to the metric system, and a similar effort would be needed to switch from base 10 to base 12; new road signs would be needed and either new currency would be needed or the base of our currency and the base of our number system wouldn't match. Day to day mathematics also becomes much more challenging for those not familiar with base 12 when you have to think in base 10 and base 12.

Further, most countries use the metric system which is based on base 10. Readjusting the metric system to be used with base 12 would be challenging; if the meter is kept the same size, then either kilometers get longer and centimeters get shorter or the base of the metric system can't match the base of the numerical system -- neither of which is a particularly appealing solution. Alternatively, these countries can change measurement systems to US measurements (they'd essentially be changing measurement systems anyway), in which case they'd need to change both number systems and measurement systems.

To claim that "switching things from base 10 to base 12 is really simple at it's core" is pretty absurd even for a single country. But for base 12 to be useful for more than just "ooh look, I can divide by 2, 3, 4, and 6!" a lot of countries would need to swap roughly simultaneously which just isn't feasible.

The international standard is already the metric system in base 10 and there's no benefits that would justify changing this to some other measurement system and base 12 considering the costs of this change.

Some of those being that all the books and texts books and computer programs that we have already are in base 10 and it's just as well to stick with that they say. That's a fair point but I think the efficiency of base 12 is worth the effort to fix all that. We live in a digital age. Our computers do I don't know how many million FLOPS. Switching things from base 10 to base 12 is really simple at it's core. And the cores of our computers work in binary, a different base anyways.

The problem is that from your statement it is obvious you don't really understand computers and therefore lack the requisite knowledge to intelligently talk about such a change.

Some of those being that all the books and texts books and computer programs that we have already are in base 10 and it's just as well to stick with that they say. That's a fair point but I think the efficiency of base 12 is worth the effort to fix all that. We live in a digital age. Our computers do I don't know how many million FLOPS. Switching things from base 10 to base 12 is really simple at it's core. And the cores of our computers work in binary, a different base anyways.

The problem is that from your statement it is obvious you don't really understand computers and therefore lack the requisite knowledge to intelligently talk about such a change.

i think you've committed an ad hominem without actually telling me specifically what part of a computer i lack understanding of.

Some of those being that all the books and texts books and computer programs that we have already are in base 10 and it's just as well to stick with that they say. That's a fair point but I think the efficiency of base 12 is worth the effort to fix all that. We live in a digital age. Our computers do I don't know how many million FLOPS. Switching things from base 10 to base 12 is really simple at it's core. And the cores of our computers work in binary, a different base anyways.

The problem is that from your statement it is obvious you don't really understand computers and therefore lack the requisite knowledge to intelligently talk about such a change.

i think you've committed an ad hominem without actually telling me specifically what part of a computer i lack understanding of.

He did. What you meant to say is that you want symbols for the duodecimal digits 10 and 11 added to Unicode, not that you want Unicode and computer hardware to be designed in base 12 (they're done in hex because it's a nicer way to represent binary because that's how circuits work). This is already happening; the turned two used for ten and the turned three used for 11 have been accepted as new Unicode characters and are expected in 2015/2016 (no rework of Unicode necessary). [http://std.dkuug.dk...]

Some of those being that all the books and texts books and computer programs that we have already are in base 10 and it's just as well to stick with that they say. That's a fair point but I think the efficiency of base 12 is worth the effort to fix all that. We live in a digital age. Our computers do I don't know how many million FLOPS. Switching things from base 10 to base 12 is really simple at it's core. And the cores of our computers work in binary, a different base anyways.

The problem is that from your statement it is obvious you don't really understand computers and therefore lack the requisite knowledge to intelligently talk about such a change.

i think you've committed an ad hominem without actually telling me specifically what part of a computer i lack understanding of.

Also, changing from base 10 to base 12 doesn't affect how computationally intensive floating point operations are. You're going to have the same problems representing the same fractions as floating point numbers in binary, and the same number of operations will be required to do the same mathematics; things don't get any more efficient because you've decided to convert to a different base.

Some of those being that all the books and texts books and computer programs that we have already are in base 10 and it's just as well to stick with that they say. That's a fair point but I think the efficiency of base 12 is worth the effort to fix all that. We live in a digital age. Our computers do I don't know how many million FLOPS. Switching things from base 10 to base 12 is really simple at it's core. And the cores of our computers work in binary, a different base anyways.

The problem is that from your statement it is obvious you don't really understand computers and therefore lack the requisite knowledge to intelligently talk about such a change.

i think you've committed an ad hominem without actually telling me specifically what part of a computer i lack understanding of.

Also, changing from base 10 to base 12 doesn't affect how computationally intensive floating point operations are. You're going to have the same problems representing the same fractions as floating point numbers in binary, and the same number of operations will be required to do the same mathematics; things don't get any more efficient because you've decided to convert to a different base.

it's just more efficient for humans, computers don't care about bases. I wasn't aware that the Pitman numerals were accepted on the unicode table somewhere down the line. what I'm getting at though is that here is the representation for arabic numerals in ascii and unicode, and the following 2 characters:

A lot of programs use the fact that the last 4 bits of an arabic numeral's character code are actually the binary value of the number. "Dek" and "el" would need to go where the colon and semi-colon are for those programs to work. So when I say rework the ascii tables and unicode tables, I mean to put "dek" as 3A and "el" as 3B, and move the colon and semi-colon somewhere to the beginning of the list to replace one of the really old codes that no one uses anymore.

At 7/30/2014 9:53:08 AM, Enji wrote:All modern countries use base 10. If only one of these countries were to switch to dozenal, then discussion and research with mathematics and science becomes substantially more challenging. Scientists have already managed to crash a spaceship into Mars because they used the wrong units; imagine what they could do when 10 actually means twelve!

Changing from base 10 to base 12 is no simple task either. The USA already failed to switch from US measurements to the metric system, and a similar effort would be needed to switch from base 10 to base 12; new road signs would be needed and either new currency would be needed or the base of our currency and the base of our number system wouldn't match. Day to day mathematics also becomes much more challenging for those not familiar with base 12 when you have to think in base 10 and base 12.

Further, most countries use the metric system which is based on base 10. Readjusting the metric system to be used with base 12 would be challenging; if the meter is kept the same size, then either kilometers get longer and centimeters get shorter or the base of the metric system can't match the base of the numerical system -- neither of which is a particularly appealing solution. Alternatively, these countries can change measurement systems to US measurements (they'd essentially be changing measurement systems anyway), in which case they'd need to change both number systems and measurement systems.

To claim that "switching things from base 10 to base 12 is really simple at it's core" is pretty absurd even for a single country. But for base 12 to be useful for more than just "ooh look, I can divide by 2, 3, 4, and 6!" a lot of countries would need to swap roughly simultaneously which just isn't feasible.

The international standard is already the metric system in base 10 and there's no benefits that would justify changing this to some other measurement system and base 12 considering the costs of this change.

the metric system, which is based on tens, is not as good as the "dometric" system, a hypothetical system based on twelves. Being able to divide each unit up into twelves is more convenient. Metric isn't fully accepted because sometimes people prefer the natural length of an inch to the unnatural length of a centimeter. As long as people are organized and mindful, they won't screw up unit conversions, it's grade 3 math. Engineers and scientists can handle it.

as for the road signs - if we ever get self-driving cars, then we wouldn't have to worry about road signs. That would be a convenient time to make the switch and let the computers worry about reading complicated road sign instructions.

day to day math is EASIER in dozenal. I stand by that. Because I took a week to memorize the dozenal multiplication table and the addiition, and it was very straightforward and I quickly learned to do math faster in dozenal than in decimal. Other people have similar experiences. I wish I could have stuck with it but I can't go against convention.

and again, we'd just have to make up the "dometric system", but isn't that a great opportunity? We can take everything we've learned from the past when it comes to measurement, and use that all to create the best measurement system so far. Twelve is the endgame number... if we successfully design the "dohmetric system" it will be the only system we ever need to use.

At 7/30/2014 9:53:08 AM, Enji wrote:All modern countries use base 10. If only one of these countries were to switch to dozenal, then discussion and research with mathematics and science becomes substantially more challenging. Scientists have already managed to crash a spaceship into Mars because they used the wrong units; imagine what they could do when 10 actually means twelve!

Changing from base 10 to base 12 is no simple task either. The USA already failed to switch from US measurements to the metric system, and a similar effort would be needed to switch from base 10 to base 12; new road signs would be needed and either new currency would be needed or the base of our currency and the base of our number system wouldn't match. Day to day mathematics also becomes much more challenging for those not familiar with base 12 when you have to think in base 10 and base 12.

Further, most countries use the metric system which is based on base 10. Readjusting the metric system to be used with base 12 would be challenging; if the meter is kept the same size, then either kilometers get longer and centimeters get shorter or the base of the metric system can't match the base of the numerical system -- neither of which is a particularly appealing solution. Alternatively, these countries can change measurement systems to US measurements (they'd essentially be changing measurement systems anyway), in which case they'd need to change both number systems and measurement systems.

To claim that "switching things from base 10 to base 12 is really simple at it's core" is pretty absurd even for a single country. But for base 12 to be useful for more than just "ooh look, I can divide by 2, 3, 4, and 6!" a lot of countries would need to swap roughly simultaneously which just isn't feasible.

The international standard is already the metric system in base 10 and there's no benefits that would justify changing this to some other measurement system and base 12 considering the costs of this change.

the metric system, which is based on tens, is not as good as the "dometric" system, a hypothetical system based on twelves. Being able to divide each unit up into twelves is more convenient. Metric isn't fully accepted because sometimes people prefer the natural length of an inch to the unnatural length of a centimeter. As long as people are organized and mindful, they won't screw up unit conversions, it's grade 3 math. Engineers and scientists can handle it.

It's easy to think that other units are somehow less intuitive or natural than your own when you grow up in a society which uses only those units, but in countries which use those other units (which happens to be most countries) people are perfectly comfortable with the length of a centimeter and think the opposite of those other units.

as for the road signs - if we ever get self-driving cars, then we wouldn't have to worry about road signs. That would be a convenient time to make the switch and let the computers worry about reading complicated road sign instructions.

This is somewhat ironic considering that on one hand you're claiming that a dozenal and a corresponding measurement system is more intuitive for humans but irrelevant to computers, and on the other hand you're claiming that a change to such a system is feasible because humans won't be doing the mathematics anyway, computers will. But you're still faced with the costs of such a change, the inaccessibility of self-driving cars to the general populace (cars with self-driving capabilities will be more expensive than those without), and the need to do a mass recall on every car to replace systems which display information in decimal with equivalents in dozenal. Even without self-driving cars this change would be cost-prohibitive, not to mention all of the other changes required for a dozenal system to be useful.

day to day math is EASIER in dozenal. I stand by that. Because I took a week to memorize the dozenal multiplication table and the addiition, and it was very straightforward and I quickly learned to do math faster in dozenal than in decimal. Other people have similar experiences. I wish I could have stuck with it but I can't go against convention.

When you are already familiar with the basics of mathematics, learning mathematics in other bases is simple. Hence the accounts of people who learned dozenal in addition to decimal and found dozenal easier are trivial.

and again, we'd just have to make up the "dometric system", but isn't that a great opportunity? We can take everything we've learned from the past when it comes to measurement, and use that all to create the best measurement system so far. Twelve is the endgame number... if we successfully design the "dohmetric system" it will be the only system we ever need to use.

It's costly, requires a massive upheaval of science and day-to-day life, and doesn't do enough better to justify its costs.

At 7/31/2014 1:56:26 PM, BradK wrote:i think you've committed an ad hominem without actually telling me specifically what part of a computer i lack understanding of.

The easiest place to start would be your propose a change that would require rewritting most software and websites, redesigning and replacing everything with a keyboard or keypad, and rewritting at a minimum all math and science textbooks. So for some trillions of dollars we get to make division/fractions a little bit easier?

It is a silly idea and you seem to have some kind of dozenal menstrual cycle because you pop up and propose it about once a month.

At 7/31/2014 1:56:26 PM, BradK wrote:i think you've committed an ad hominem without actually telling me specifically what part of a computer i lack understanding of.

The easiest place to start would be your propose a change that would require rewritting most software and websites, redesigning and replacing everything with a keyboard or keypad, and rewritting at a minimum all math and science textbooks. So for some trillions of dollars we get to make division/fractions a little bit easier?

It is a silly idea and you seem to have some kind of dozenal menstrual cycle because you pop up and propose it about once a month.

a lot of software already has multiple bases, a lot of IDEs or file splitters/joiners or hex editors for example. You can just toggle the base. You could just put that functionality into other programs obviously, like word editors or spreadsheet programs or graphing programs.

Where did you get the "trillions of dollars" number? Did you just make it up off the top of your head? If you did then saying "it costs too much" isn't a well supported argument.

At 7/30/2014 9:53:08 AM, Enji wrote:All modern countries use base 10. If only one of these countries were to switch to dozenal, then discussion and research with mathematics and science becomes substantially more challenging. Scientists have already managed to crash a spaceship into Mars because they used the wrong units; imagine what they could do when 10 actually means twelve!

Changing from base 10 to base 12 is no simple task either. The USA already failed to switch from US measurements to the metric system, and a similar effort would be needed to switch from base 10 to base 12; new road signs would be needed and either new currency would be needed or the base of our currency and the base of our number system wouldn't match. Day to day mathematics also becomes much more challenging for those not familiar with base 12 when you have to think in base 10 and base 12.

Further, most countries use the metric system which is based on base 10. Readjusting the metric system to be used with base 12 would be challenging; if the meter is kept the same size, then either kilometers get longer and centimeters get shorter or the base of the metric system can't match the base of the numerical system -- neither of which is a particularly appealing solution. Alternatively, these countries can change measurement systems to US measurements (they'd essentially be changing measurement systems anyway), in which case they'd need to change both number systems and measurement systems.

To claim that "switching things from base 10 to base 12 is really simple at it's core" is pretty absurd even for a single country. But for base 12 to be useful for more than just "ooh look, I can divide by 2, 3, 4, and 6!" a lot of countries would need to swap roughly simultaneously which just isn't feasible.

The international standard is already the metric system in base 10 and there's no benefits that would justify changing this to some other measurement system and base 12 considering the costs of this change.

the metric system, which is based on tens, is not as good as the "dometric" system, a hypothetical system based on twelves. Being able to divide each unit up into twelves is more convenient. Metric isn't fully accepted because sometimes people prefer the natural length of an inch to the unnatural length of a centimeter. As long as people are organized and mindful, they won't screw up unit conversions, it's grade 3 math. Engineers and scientists can handle it.

It's easy to think that other units are somehow less intuitive or natural than your own when you grow up in a society which uses only those units, but in countries which use those other units (which happens to be most countries) people are perfectly comfortable with the length of a centimeter and think the opposite of those other units.

well I grew up with the metric system actually. But I think it's easier to estimate in feet or inches rather than centimeters or meters.

as for the road signs - if we ever get self-driving cars, then we wouldn't have to worry about road signs. That would be a convenient time to make the switch and let the computers worry about reading complicated road sign instructions.

This is somewhat ironic considering that on one hand you're claiming that a dozenal and a corresponding measurement system is more intuitive for humans but irrelevant to computers, and on the other hand you're claiming that a change to such a system is feasible because humans won't be doing the mathematics anyway, computers will. But you're still faced with the costs of such a change, the inaccessibility of self-driving cars to the general populace (cars with self-driving capabilities will be more expensive than those without), and the need to do a mass recall on every car to replace systems which display information in decimal with equivalents in dozenal. Even without self-driving cars this change would be cost-prohibitive, not to mention all of the other changes required for a dozenal system to be useful.

I'm just saying that if we have self-driving cars, then we don't need to worry about road signs. I agree it could be confusing if some road signs are in base ten, and some aren't. When you are driving you don't want to to math either way. So self-driving cars is one solution to the problem.

Another solution could be colour coding the signs. Or for the colour blind, maybe using characters. Speed limits are only 1 of 8 different numbers usually, 20, 30... 80, 90. I would think that people don't actually treat it as numbers they treat it as objects in their mind. Like 40 zones are one "type", 90 zones are another "type". So it would probably be just as easy to map them out, like

for example. The speedometer could also use this mapping. Then also that solves the problem of km/h or mph as well, as a side effect.

day to day math is EASIER in dozenal. I stand by that. Because I took a week to memorize the dozenal multiplication table and the addiition, and it was very straightforward and I quickly learned to do math faster in dozenal than in decimal. Other people have similar experiences. I wish I could have stuck with it but I can't go against convention.

When you are already familiar with the basics of mathematics, learning mathematics in other bases is simple. Hence the accounts of people who learned dozenal in addition to decimal and found dozenal easier are trivial.

The accounts of people saying that it's easier are not trivial. It's easier and better and the accounts testify that. Why use the crappier decimal system?

and again, we'd just have to make up the "dometric system", but isn't that a great opportunity? We can take everything we've learned from the past when it comes to measurement, and use that all to create the best measurement system so far. Twelve is the endgame number... if we successfully design the "dohmetric system" it will be the only system we ever need to use.

It's costly, requires a massive upheaval of science and day-to-day life, and doesn't do enough better to justify its costs.

You've probably never tried learning dozenal. You don't realize what you are missing out on if you haven't tried it for yourself. I can ramble on about "yeah yeah yeah is better", but until you actually see it for yourself I don't think it will sink in.

To give an idea of the cost of just a small change, consider mile markers spread out a tenth of a mile apart over tens of thousands of miles of roadway; there are millions of mile marker signs on US roadways. Each mile marker costs between $50 and $150, depending on the sign. Including labour, mile markers cost around $1,500 per mile of highway, there are hundreds of thousands of miles of roadway, which amounts to several hundred million dollars. These are just the milemarkers. Other signs are more expensive if less frequent, so you're looking at a cost of billions dollars just to resign roads US roads.

But keep in mind there's other changes which need to happen too. Interior car parts like speedometers and mileage counters (and some electronics on newer cars) need to be replaced on all cars being driven on roads. All school textbooks containing numbers will need to be replaced. All/nearly all currency will need to be minted new to replace existing currency. People's finances will need to be converted to base 12 and financial records will need to be rewritten, all without affecting the data. Et cetera. All of these changes cost time and money; Floid's claim of trillions of dollars may seem far-fetched to you, but he's probably not so far off.

If you want, challenge me to a debate "The benefits of dozenal are worth the costs of switching from decimal" and I'll be Con.

At 7/31/2014 1:56:26 PM, BradK wrote:i think you've committed an ad hominem without actually telling me specifically what part of a computer i lack understanding of.

The easiest place to start would be your propose a change that would require rewritting most software and websites, redesigning and replacing everything with a keyboard or keypad, and rewritting at a minimum all math and science textbooks. So for some trillions of dollars we get to make division/fractions a little bit easier?

It is a silly idea and you seem to have some kind of dozenal menstrual cycle because you pop up and propose it about once a month.

a lot of software already has multiple bases, a lot of IDEs or file splitters/joiners or hex editors for example. You can just toggle the base. You could just put that functionality into other programs obviously, like word editors or spreadsheet programs or graphing programs.

Where did you get the "trillions of dollars" number? Did you just make it up off the top of your head? If you did then saying "it costs too much" isn't a well supported argument.

Machine code is always in base 2. As fundamentally the bits that make it work are electronic switches that are either on or off.

A collection of these switches make a logical register, which in almost all hardware is either 8,16,32, 64 or 128 switches in a bank.

Hexidecimal works nicely as it's very easy to convert each hex character into four bits in a register.

Dozenal is no better or worse than any other base excluding the power 2 bases, which have use because if the ease of use with computers because they are the only ones that can directly translate to physical hardware (until tristate quantumn computing comes into play and potentially base 3 could be useful) on a unit by unit basis. EG base two is one character per one bit, four is one char per two bits, eight is three bits, hex is four. Twelve is just as much a pain as ten.

If you flipped a magic switch and move everything to dozenal, nothing gets any easier. It's simply a way of representating a quantity.

At 8/1/2014 3:49:38 PM, Enji wrote:To give an idea of the cost of just a small change, consider mile markers spread out a tenth of a mile apart over tens of thousands of miles of roadway; there are millions of mile marker signs on US roadways. Each mile marker costs between $50 and $150, depending on the sign. Including labour, mile markers cost around $1,500 per mile of highway, there are hundreds of thousands of miles of roadway, which amounts to several hundred million dollars. These are just the milemarkers. Other signs are more expensive if less frequent, so you're looking at a cost of billions dollars just to resign roads US roads.

But keep in mind there's other changes which need to happen too. Interior car parts like speedometers and mileage counters (and some electronics on newer cars) need to be replaced on all cars being driven on roads. All school textbooks containing numbers will need to be replaced. All/nearly all currency will need to be minted new to replace existing currency. People's finances will need to be converted to base 12 and financial records will need to be rewritten, all without affecting the data. Et cetera. All of these changes cost time and money; Floid's claim of trillions of dollars may seem far-fetched to you, but he's probably not so far off.

If you want, challenge me to a debate "The benefits of dozenal are worth the costs of switching from decimal" and I'll be Con.

roadsides are one example yes. The decimal system has become quite the parasite and lodged itself into society quite firmly and it will certainly be expensive to remove it. Road signs, house numbers, street numbers, store signs, as you said the list goes on.

The angle I approach this from is that, yeah it's expensive, but it's kind of sad we are stuck with the worse base. We made the wrong choice. (The decimal vs dozenal debate is over and dozenal won, when you only consider the radices themselves and nothing else, I would be glad to show you this debate if you aren't sold on dozenal vs decimal - dozenal wins.) The only option for debate on the topic is "dozenal integration into society vs leaving it as decimal". There was a numberphile video on youtube about it, and an idea has stuck out so much and affected me so much:

"changing to dozenal is nearly impossible, but it's sad that we'll probably be stuck with this mistake forever."

not just textbooks, but all books period would have to be switched, you are right. My argument for that is (I think I mentioned it before) converting all books to digital format and then getting a computer to convert all the numbers.

for financial records or any number records really, you could just store a dozenal version and a decimal version. An added layer of complexity yes, but it's a start.

---

I think a lot of people approach it as if the entire world had to step in unison to make the change. I don't think it would have to be that way. I think it's like picking up a bag of rocks, you pick up one at a time rather than pick up the whole thing at once. It would require creative solutions and motivation and incentive. Start with having dozenal only as a special interest. Then slowly let it seep into practical areas, like maybe have stores and buildings and streets with dozenal themes. I kind of tend to only look at the final result, but you have to agree that the final result (a fully global dozenal convention) would be preferable to our current decimal world?

There are roughly 7 billion people that would need to be convinced, you have been at this for months and so far you have convinced zero people.

Do the math.

Zero people from what sample exactly? Ignoring the misses and only counting the hits is a logical fallacy, and also ignoring the hits and counting the misses (what you are doing in this case) is also obviously a fallacy. How many "hits" do we have, or in other words, people who would advocate a switch to dozenal? At least one that we are certain of, me, but lets pick a larger sample size than this thread. Doing a google search, there are other people who want to switch.

So saying there are 0 people convinced so far is wrong. Have I, only considering people on this site, convinced 0 people? Maybe. Maybe there are lurkers who agree with me. But that doesn't really matter; if we look at the whole state of affairs at the current time, there are dozenal societies, individuals like me out there - that's what matters. There's more than 1 guy on the planet who wants this to happen.

---

and you say it would take too long? So we shouldn't do it? What if we adopted that mindset on all projects that would take "too long"? Why not ask ourselves if we can shorten the amount of time needed to complete the project?

The cost problem will not be mentioned in this post, as it was debated already. However, there is one unaddressed and unseen problem with dozenal: the very reason we had decimal in the first place. After all, most people don't have 12 fingers on their hands.

There are roughly 7 billion people that would need to be convinced, you have been at this for months and so far you have convinced zero people.

Do the math.

Zero people from what sample exactly? Ignoring the misses and only counting the hits is a logical fallacy, and also ignoring the hits and counting the misses (what you are doing in this case) is also obviously a fallacy. How many "hits" do we have, or in other words, people who would advocate a switch to dozenal? At least one that we are certain of, me, but lets pick a larger sample size than this thread. Doing a google search, there are other people who want to switch.

So saying there are 0 people convinced so far is wrong. Have I, only considering people on this site, convinced 0 people? Maybe. Maybe there are lurkers who agree with me. But that doesn't really matter; if we look at the whole state of affairs at the current time, there are dozenal societies, individuals like me out there - that's what matters. There's more than 1 guy on the planet who wants this to happen.

Yeah, but none of them can get women, so it's only a matter of time until they go extinct

and you say it would take too long? So we shouldn't do it? What if we adopted that mindset on all projects that would take "too long"? Why not ask ourselves if we can shorten the amount of time needed to complete the project?

Forever is too long.

"It is one of the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power of perception is also the limit of all there is to perceive." " C. W. Leadbeater

Hey, just because there are more people in the flat earth society than there are behind your dozenal movement, I don"t want to discourage you.

I just think that if you want to bring about broad worldwide change, you need to start small, go after a few things first, like, oh, I don"t know, eggs, donuts, or maybe roses, little things like that. Then maybe move on to things like clocks, months, or days of Christmas and zodiac signs, I think that kind of approach would probably be best.

"It is one of the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power of perception is also the limit of all there is to perceive." " C. W. Leadbeater

At 8/2/2014 7:33:00 AM, jh1234l wrote:The cost problem will not be mentioned in this post, as it was debated already. However, there is one unaddressed and unseen problem with dozenal: the very reason we had decimal in the first place. After all, most people don't have 12 fingers on their hands.

At 8/2/2014 7:15:41 PM, Sidewalker wrote:Hey, just because there are more people in the flat earth society than there are behind your dozenal movement, I don"t want to discourage you.

I just think that if you want to bring about broad worldwide change, you need to start small, go after a few things first, like, oh, I don"t know, eggs, donuts, or maybe roses, little things like that. Then maybe move on to things like clocks, months, or days of Christmas and zodiac signs, I think that kind of approach would probably be best.

I can tell you aren't being very serious in this post. Mostly because some of the things you listed (clocks, donuts, eggs) are already in a dozenal base. Especially clocks, a half-day has 12 units. Decimal time would be terrible don't you agree?

At 8/2/2014 7:33:00 AM, jh1234l wrote:The cost problem will not be mentioned in this post, as it was debated already. However, there is one unaddressed and unseen problem with dozenal: the very reason we had decimal in the first place. After all, most people don't have 12 fingers on their hands.

you have 14 phalanges on each hand

FTFY (unless jh1234l is missing a hand and a thumb in which case I've broken that for you)

At 8/2/2014 7:33:00 AM, jh1234l wrote:The cost problem will not be mentioned in this post, as it was debated already. However, there is one unaddressed and unseen problem with dozenal: the very reason we had decimal in the first place. After all, most people don't have 12 fingers on their hands.

you have 14 phalanges on each hand

FTFY (unless jh1234l is missing a hand and a thumb in which case I've broken that for you)